2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThe Case Against Hillary Clinton
The Case Against Hillary Clinton
http://theweek.com/articles/601909/case-against-hillary-clinton
Much of the argument in the Democratic Party primary has hinged on who is more electable. Hillary Clinton, as the more moderate candidate, has a somewhat more plausible case on this score though at the moment she does a bit worse than her opponent Bernie Sanders in head-to-head polling matchups.
But consider a separate question: Would Clinton actually be a good president? No, argues Doug Henwood in his book My Turn: Hillary Clinton Targets the Presidency. As Daniel Davies observes, it provides a brief, reasonable survey of the case against returning Clinton to the presidency, free of the right-wing dreck clogging up the internet. The whole book is worth reading, but the main argument can be grouped under three headings.
1. Clinton is far too aggressive with the use of military force. Because the American president has a nearly free hand when it comes to foreign policy, this is the most important part of the anti-Clinton brief. Her history suggests she would be more aggressive than President Obama (who hasn't been much of a dove himself).
Most notoriously, she voted for the war in Iraq even endorsing the Bush administration's false accusation that Saddam Hussein had given "aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members" but it's been a consistent theme even after that gruesome catastrophe. As secretary of state, she supported escalation in Afghanistan, pushed hard for the Libyan intervention, and lobbied for a continued military presence in Iraq. She was on the hawkish edge of internal Obama administration debates on Syria, plotting with then-CIA Director David Petraeus to arm rebels there (though the plan was rejected by the president).
:::snip:::
Yet even though she lost the 2008 primary by a hair largely because of her vote for the Iraq war, Clinton has continued to attack Sanders from the right on foreign policy. A few days ago, she tore into him for suggesting that the U.S. ought to consider gradually normalizing relations with Iran, as it has with Cuba. It suggests real ideological commitment and in a bad way.
Read more:
http://theweek.com/articles/601909/case-against-hillary-clinton
brooklynite
(94,585 posts)...I could just as easily argue that the fact that she got as many votes as Obama (the difference was in which States they were obtained) indicates that the Iraq vote was inconsequential.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)was the only real serious gripe I had against her in 2008. If not for that, I would have given her more consideration, and a whole lot of people would not have had that as a big issue.
With it, it was only natural for Democrats who had opposed the war to align against her. With the results as close as they were, I happen to agree that it probably made the difference.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)This is exactly what she was talking about in the Town Hall last night. And people just willingly spread this propaganda around.
It doesn't take much digging to find the ties to the Cato Institute and Koch Brothers to that publication.
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)All the so-called liberal media outlets are totally in the tank for Hillary. If you want to read more than puff pieces on her and unfounded attacks on Sanders, you have to look elsewhere. You're not going to find it in the pro-Hillary media.
People you like aren't always right -- and people you don't like aren't always wrong.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)And I have a lot of disdain for those who are willing to spread the Koch's propaganda for them.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Great logic.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Says a lot about what they actually stand for.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)That's for damn sure.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)just a fact.
I don't know anything about the website in question, and frankly, I don't CARE.
I like this article as it aptly describes my feelings on her as a candidate, and it certainly is NOT written from any right-wing perspective-- they all loved the war.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)99% of the anti-Hillary pieces posted on DU as of late come from right wing sources, and you chuckleheads lap it up.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)i've probably posted 100s of OPs since Primary began, and not ONE was from RW
website, but from common dreams, Huffpo, NYTimes, TruthDig, MoJo, The Guardian,
et. al. These kinds ^ of sources are all that I've seen, save a tiny handful of one-offs
from lesser known possibly RW sources.
Just curious: Do you consider The Intercept RW?
You can whine all you like, but at least tell the truth when you do.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)Redstate, Fox News, WSJ Op-Eds, National Review, Washington Times, New York Post, News Max, Judicial Watch, and even a couple Breitbarts... All smearing Clinton. Anytime I (or anyone else) calls it out, we are greeted with claims of "shooting the messenger", and doubling down on the defense of posting said sources. 99% may have been an exaggeration, but there certainly is a LOT.
No, I do not consider The Intercept RW. I don't like The Intercept, as I think Greenwald is a hack and an ass, but I don't see it as a RW source. Maybe an anti-Democratic source (at times), but it's just as anti-RW as it is anti-Dem (IMHO, YMMV).
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)That said, the RW echo chamber is what the Dem nominee is going to be facing in the GE,
so it's not like what they are saying is totally irrelevant, but must be taken with a huge
grain of salt and fact-checked vigorously.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)whether HRC or SBS get the nod. I just don't think it should be here on DU.
emulatorloo
(44,130 posts)You wanna roll around in the mud with these crooks, that's fine.
Bernie doesn't need these right wing creeps to win.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)the MSM is Pro-Hillary and that they have to go to "other" sources to find anti-Hillary pieces, not necessarily this piece.
I don't bother giving opinion pieces like this the time of day to read much more than a paragraph. Opinions are like assholes, ya know.
frylock
(34,825 posts)All too well.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)since you haven't actually read it, and opinions are like assholes. GOT it.
Criticizing an article and labeling it as a right-wing smear job when you've only read a paragraph of it, sounds like something any uninformed... "person"... could do.
Dr Hobbitstein
(6,568 posts)I was criticizing the poster who thought it OK to go to RW sources because the MSM is "pro-Hillary".
Pay attention, sir.
SHRED
(28,136 posts)"So while Clinton would surely be better than whatever crawls out of the Republican primary swamp, her presidency would be a step back for the nation as a whole."
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Only by counting Michigan, where Clintons name was on the ballot but Obamas was not, can Clinton claim to have won more votes.
uponit7771
(90,346 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)Hillary supporters are smearing this article because it sums up Hillary very well. It should be read in its entirety.
EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)That alone will never allow me vote for her...
She's either extremely stupid or extremely dishonest... and she's not stupid.
Lorien
(31,935 posts)Hillary wants to attack Iran: http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-clinton-if-im-president-we-will-attack-iran/5460484
Hillary pushed Fracking on the rest of the planet: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/09/hillary-clinton-fracking-shale-state-department-chevron
Hillary and childhood poverty: http://www.salon.com/2015/10/15/the_worst_thing_hillary_clinton_has_ever_done/
What Hillary calls "feminism" : https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/03/hillary-clinton-womens-rights-feminism/
Hillary takes millions in campaign cash from her "enemies": http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/10/14/hillary-takes-millions-in-campaign-cash-from-enemies
Bernie has a MUCH better record of accomplishments as Senator than Hillary does: https://pplswar.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/fact-bernie-sanders-got-more-done-in-the-senate-than-hillary-clinton/
When you ask me to vote for Hillary: https://medium.com/@Lookingforrobyn/when-you-ask-me-to-vote-for-hillary-174becdb5ccc#.2ixs3cg5o
Hillary's legacy of pushing the party to the right: http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/33869-hillary-clinton-s-ghosts-a-legacy-of-pushing-the-democratic-party-to-the-right
Chomsky: Democrats are now moderate Republicans: http://trofire.com/2015/09/23/noam-chomsky-dems-are-now-moderate-repugs-republicans-are-now-off-the-spectrum-of-reality/
A blatant lie:
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Why did she take the Goldman-Sachs Money for Speeches? "Because it's what they Offered!" And, the rest where she tries to dig herself out of what she just blurted out.
And, she runs on saying she has the judgement and experience to be "The Commander--in-Chief," the ability to Reign in Wall Street and work for the Average American.
AzDar
(14,023 posts)Lorien
(31,935 posts)one lives in a spacious new high rise in Manhattan, another couple are directors of major motion pictures, and one is a comfortable "former" Republican. None are members of the 99% or liberal Democrats.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)magical thyme
(14,881 posts)Lorien
(31,935 posts)You Hillary hypocrites will be ENTIRELY responsible for putting a Republican in the White House. But then, you'd rather have Cruz there than a real Liberal Progressive like Bernie. There's no doubt about that!
http://trofire.com/2015/09/23/noam-chomsky-dems-are-now-moderate-repugs-republicans-are-now-off-the-spectrum-of-reality/
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)She's well to the right of the old GOP.